Home of the Leeds Labour Group on Leeds City Council

Uncategorized

After being celebrated widely during the first part of the twentieth century, International Women’s Day was neglected, apart from in the Soviet Union, where men would present women with flowers and make them a cup of tea, presumably as some sort of sop for doing nothing for them the rest of the year. This was until the second wave of the Women’s Liberation Movement in the late 1960s; from that time, women all over the world celebrate and campaign in the days surrounding March 8th.

In Leeds, in the late 1970s, feminists booked the then-empty-and-going-on-for-derelict Corn Exchange and promoted International Women’s Day events, with lots of stalls showcasing women’s organisations and businesses, film screenings, music, singing, talks, massage, and the chance to help build a wall, facilitated by the organisation Women in Manual Trades. This was very popular; queues of women snaked up Vicar Lane before the start, and we were full all day.

This idea was taken up again in the 1980s, when Leeds City Council Women’s Sub-Committee offered similar all-day programmes in the Corn Exchange and eventually, the Lord Mayor’s Banqueting Suite in the Civic Hall. Women’s groups all over Leeds also put on events, from motor bike riding to screen printing, conferences against violence against women, steel band concerts and South Asian dancing, funded by a special International Women’s Day grant pot. Vera Media’s 1987’s short film exploring the history of the day, highlighting activities all over the world and focussing especially on events in Leeds, was distributed nationally. (We showed it recently to a audience of mainly young women at the Hyde Park Book Club; 30 years on, it went down very well).

This year, there’s still time to catch some events in Leeds, like I Am Woman (Hear Me Roar); Girl Gang Presents Cool for Crafts Market; the Feminist Archive North exhibition; Edit Wikipedia for Women; and International Women’s Day – the Promised Band, a film exploring women’s lives in Israel and Palestine and how a rock band brought them together. See www.leedsinspired.co.uk/internationalwomen’s day for details. Leeds Beckett University and Leeds University also have events, among others listed online.

In the twenty-first century, International Women’s Day is as relevant and necessary as it ever was. Get out there and enjoy.

We are writing regarding funding arrangements for Conservative-run Surrey County Council. Specifically, the alleged reason behind David Hodge’s decision to drop a planned referendum on increasing council tax by 15 per cent to cover the severe shortfalls in social care, after apparently holding ‘several conversations’ with Whitehall figures.

It has been widely reported in leaked texts, sent by David Hodge supposedly intended for Nick King, Sajid Javid’s special advisor, that DCLG was working on a ‘Memorandum of Understanding.’

In response, as Leaders of Labour councils and council groups, we have a series of questions:

Was a deal struck for Surrey County Council?

If so, what are the details of the deal?

Why was a special deal struck with Surrey behind closed doors?

Does the Government finally recognise that local Government is grossly underfunded and is that why they have given a special deal to Surrey?

Does the Government now recognise that there will be a £2.6bn shortfall in social care funding by 2020?

If a deal was struck, will Ministers offer the same deal given to Surrey to all councils, regardless of political affiliation, when the Local Government finance settlement is published on 22nd February?

We have a crisis in social care, resulting from the Conservative Government’s cuts to local authority funding. Secret backroom deals are not the answer. We urgently need a proper solution, which means providing councils with the funding they needed to solve this crisis.

Given the public interest in this matter we will be publishing this letter.

Yours sincerely,

Judith Blake Leeds City Council
Barrie Grunwald St Helen’s Council
Mohammed Butt Brent Council
Richard Watts Islington Council
Stewart Young Cumbria County Council
Simon Henig Durham County Council
Nick Forbes Newcastle City Council
Lewis Herbert Cambridge City Council
Peter Martland Milton Keynes Council
Warren Morgan Brighton & Hove City Council
Jaz Athwal Redbridge Council
Sharon Taylor Stevenage Council
Simon Greaves Bassetlaw Council
Peter John Southwark Council
Sam Dixon Cheshire West and Chester Council
Steven Brady Hull City Council
Iain Malcolm South Tyneside Council
Ray Oxby North East Lincolnshire Council
David Budd Middlesborough Council
Jean Stretton Oldham Council
Simon Letts Southampton Council
Sue Jeffrey Redcar and Cleveland Council
Doug Taylor Enfield Council
Susan Hinchcliffe Bradford Council
Mark Townsend Burnley District Council
Hazel Simmons Luton Council
Alan Rhodes Nottinghamshire County Council
Claire Kober Harringey Council
Peter Box Wakefield Council
Christopher Akers-Belcher Hartlepool Council
Richard Leese Manchester City Council
Bob Price Oxford Council
Tom Beattie Corby Council
Sachan Shah Harrow Council
Bob Cook Stockton Council
John Clancy Birmingham City Council
Julian Bell Ealing Council
Julie Dore Sheffield City Council
Steve Bullock Lewisham Council
Shaun Davies Telford & Wrekin Council
Terry O’Neill Warrington Council
Stephen Lydon Stroud Council
Phil Davies Wirral Council
Alexander Ganotis Stockport Council
Steve Eling Sandwell Council
Sarah Hayward Camden Council
Peter Lamb Crawley Council
Simon Blackburn Blackpool Council
Steve Houghton Barnsley Council
Jon Collins Nottingham City Council
Robin Wales Newham Council
Alistair Bradley Chorley Council
Stephen Alambritis Merton Council
Darren Rodwell Barking and Dagenham Council
Ian Maher Sefton Council
Ros Jones Doncaster Council
Roger Lawrence Wolverhampton Council
Martin Gannon Gateshead Council
Tim Swift Calderdale Council
Cliff Morris Bolton Council
Pete Lowe Dudley Council
Tony Newman Croydon Council

The decommissioning of care home which directly impinges on many elderly and vulnerable people and their carers is one of those difficult decisions.

Many people on Leeds City Council, including myself, have an elderly parent who we want the best for. Disrupting the lives of vulnerable is not be done lightly and only after careful consideration, consultation and when all options are exhausted.

We have to balance the impact we have on current residents whilst ensuring we are capable of meeting future needs for those who will need our support in the future.

In 2011 it was recognised that doing nothing to change provision of adult care was not an option and we have made many changes since then, including decommissioning of eight homes and many day centres in Leeds.

The MBI’s position is confused. In Morley Town Hall they call for no closures at all, in Leeds Civic Hall they talk about a reprieve for only two years. Why two years? Why not one or three? With the Conservative Government cutting £314 million from Leeds what will happen over the next two years to improve the financial position of the council?

The demand pressures on adult care are around increasing by around £20m per year, there are more elderly people – and the resources of the council to meet that demand are reducing, despite the extra Osborne levy on Leeds Council tax payers raising £5.2m this year. It is nowhere near enough. As we all know we are increasing every year the proportion of the council spend on adult care – 40.6% this year. In 2011 when I was elected it was 30%.

This cannot go on for ever we have to take a different approach.

The better lives strategy is an alternative approach and is about supporting people to stay in their homes or ensuring they have alternative models such as extracare housing to meet demand. I believe we will be bring forward proposals early next year to invest £31m over the next three years to improve our ability to meet future demand for extracare housing.

If we do nothing for 2 years we will incur another of £4.2m of costs – then we will still be faced with the same difficult decision about decommissioning of these homes. The economics will not change.

In politics as in life delaying a decision does not help. Booting this into the long grass will not make the decision easier when it comes, it will make it harder.

We have to recognise that demand for places in our care homes is dropping Siegen Manor has an occupancy rate of less than 7O%. Only 7 of the residents in Siegen Manor are from Morley. Our remaining care homes are well run and have excellent staff but we do not have the money to invest in existing or new care new homes. Only the Independent sector can do that.

We need to ensure we provide alternatives such as extra care housing and promote good quality private sector provision. In Morley I will work to ensure we do have good quality provision to replace Siegen Manor through the private sector or with investment in extracare.

March 8th every year, International Women’s Day. And every year without fail Facebook and Twitter timelines fill up with – “why don’t we have International Men’s Day!!!?!” – well we do, it was on Saturday.

All of us have multiple identities, and for me being male is one of those – but what does it mean to be a man today, and what are our issues we would highlight on international men’s day.

When we look on the national stage we have plenty of male figures to look up to. Nigel Farage, Donald Trump, Boris Johnson – all towering figures who have reached those dizzying heights by belittling and degrading others, male or female.

Compare this to some celebrated figures on the current and recent world stage who act as role models for women – Hillary Clinton, who received more votes for President of the United States than any white man in history, Harriet Harman, whose list of achievements for women in the UK is endless, Angela Merkel going for her fourth term as Chancellor of Germany or Amal Clooney the British-Lebanese lawyer, activist, and author who recently took on a human trafficking survivor as a client in a groundbreaking legal case to prosecute ISIS generals for genocide.

Is there no huge swell of activity on international men’s day because being male is not a liberation cause? I am not oppressed for my gender in the way that many are for their race, disability, sexuality or religion. But this does not mean that men do not have specific issues that need addressing.

Last month researchers at the Centre for Men’s Health Leeds Beckett University published a study commissioned by Leeds City Council on the state on Men’s Health in the city. Men are more likely to die young than women, suicide rates for men are 5 times higher, and young boys are less likely to achieve a good level of basic education and higher grade GCSEs compared to their female peers.

How to respond to this presents a challenge, those politicians who have entered the fray with men’s issues at the core of their politics haven’t done so in the spirit of helping those vulnerable men – they have done so as part of an anti-feminist rhetoric.

Phillip Davis MP said that “men have lost their voices” – and he’s right. As an elected representative he has been so distracted by criticising women politicians for standing up for women, that he’s forgotten to stand up for any men himself.

As a MP, Phillip Davis has supported huge cuts to local Government. In Leeds we are directly responsible for Public Health – we can directly affect the state of men’s health. But while Mr Davis MP is waxing lyrical about men’s issues, he votes to take over £314 million from Leeds, directly detrimental to men’s health. It’s hypocritical.

We have had men right at the top of the political world since the beginning of time – and these men’s issues have not been dealt with. What does that tell us? We must demand better from those with power.

Now – it’s not that I think that women can only represent women and men can only represent men – but it is a second rate politician who spends their time pointing at others and saying – ‘it’s their fault things are like this’ rather than getting stuck in and resolving a problem themselves. This attitude of blaming others seems to be in vogue at the moment, be it Mexicans, Eastern Europeans or feminists. It’s incorrect and frankly lazy.

Without feminism my sisters would not be equal to me – and I do not want to achieve what I achieve because of certain advantages society lends to my gender – I want to get there on my own merit, because of what I think, say and do.

As a male politician in Leeds, I celebrate the fact that our Leeds Labour Group is now majority women (32 women, 31 men). It demonstrates a fairness to all 63 of us, ensuring that we who govern the city of Leeds, represent the city of Leeds. It does not diminish me as a man to be treated equally – it enhances it.

So international men’s day, let’s look at what we can do as a city to address these problems specifically facing men. But nobody’s rights and representation should come at the expense of another – and it is a poor politician who will tell you otherwise.

In the past few months, we’ve seen Theresa May and her Tory colleagues talking seriously about taking the backward step to reintroduce the grammar school system. Labour understands that grammar schools widen the divide between children from disadvantaged backgrounds and those from more privileged ones and have no place in a society where every child gets the best start in life.

It’s an absolute disgrace that the Tory Government are proposing to categorise children from the age of eleven by way of a test that can easily be abused by those with the cash to do so. This dangerous strategy is underpinned by the Government’s wrongly held view that selective schools are best placed to support underperforming schools.

We know that grammar schools are over representative of advantaged pupils from families with the skills and educational background to support them. Will these grammar schools really be able to improve schools with a greater mix of disadvantaged, lower achieving pupils and the associated problems of child poverty? I don’t believe they will but luckily we know that local government has a proven track record when it comes to school improvement.

Recent data gathered by the Local Government Association has shown that local authorities have more success in raising school standards than academies or free schools. The LGA say that almost nine out of ten council-run primary and secondary schools are rated as Good or Outstanding, which is a higher number than among academies and free schools. Richard Watts, the Chair of the LGAs Children and Young People’s Board, has said that local authorities have continued to prove their effectiveness in raising school standards using their relationship with schools and their in-depth knowledge of their local areas. He has gone on to question the ability of unaccountable Regional School Commissioners to turn around underperforming schools across large geographic areas they know nothing about. I would also seriously question their ability to turn around schools with a pupil make-up of which they have virtually no experience dealing with and very little desire to gain any. and have demonstrated very little desire to gain any understanding.

Social segregation is not the answer to educational improvement, the answer is real investment and real support through local authorities who know their schools, know their areas and have the experience of delivering the best possible outcomes for pupils and teachers.

Back in 2010, when David Cameron and Nick Clegg where pledging themselves to one other on steps on Number 10, Leeds City Council received £445 million a year in funding from central Government. This is funding that is spent on front line services here in Leeds – on care homes, public transport, housing and our environment. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats cut this £445 million a year right down to £231 million a year – and now, the Conservatives want to take an additional £100 million from Leeds every year. Leaving us with less than 30% of the Government funding we had before the Coalition came to power 6 years ago.

We’ve seen these ideological cuts to Education, to Health, to Defence and to our Police – but none of them have been cut by 71% as Leeds local Government has.

This has a very real impact on frontline services. Absolute poverty is estimated to affect 155,000 people in Leeds, and local Government is the most effective way of tackling this poverty. Leeds City Council is doing what it can, by boosting apprenticeships and by paying the real living wage – but the huge cuts from the Conservatives are only taking us backwards.

When Iain Duncan Smith resigned from Government, he himself stated that “Certain policies..are more and more..distinctly political rather than in the national economic interest.”

These cuts are a political choice and not an economic necessity, and they are not over yet.

On Wednesday 14th September, Leeds City Council held a meeting of all Councillors, and voted on a motion to condemn the cuts already made to Leeds, and to halt the additional £100 million of cuts. Unfortunately the Leeds Conservatives voted against this motion.

The Government’s decision to take all this money from Leeds in such a sustained and counterproductive period of austerity has had an unfair and damaging impact on the city. There are now 14,000 more people in Leeds, living in deprivation, since the start of these cuts.

Interestingly, this has not been the case in all Councils. Down South, the Conservative run Council’s of Surrey, Buckinghamshire and Hampshire have received payments of £24 million £9 million and £19 million respectively, to help them cope with this imposed austerity.

In fact, if Leeds received the same level of Government funding per person as Wokingham in Berkshire, the council with the lowest level of cuts, we would have an additional £100 million per annum in our budget.

Just think what that could do to our levels of poverty and deprivation here in Leeds.

As an elected member of Leeds City Council, the biggest local authority north of Birmingham, discussions of devolution and the northern powerhouse are never too far away.

There are lots of reasons for Labour councillors to get excited about regional devolution. It has the potential to provide fiscal devolution which would enable increased spending on public transport and local health services and it would be an opportunity to give local communities more of a say about what happens to them and their area. But there are also a whole host of challenges and underlying concerns. Will this just be a token transfer of power from one set of politicians to another? Will the Tories simply use this as a stick to beat Labour councils with?

This aside, Labour can’t be seen as being afraid of devolution. Instead this is a moment to be bold, to let go and let communities shape the devolved future they want to see. Our party leadership and the parliamentary Labour Party can learn a lot from Labour in power in the north. City councils like Leeds and Manchester are finding innovative ways to make social and economic progress in spite of funding shortfalls. Leeds is the UK’s fastest growing economy and that isn’t because of George Osbourne it’s because of the Labour council. We need to empower Labour councils who are minimising the worst effects of the cuts and showing the positive difference Labour in power can make.

It’s vital that any devolution deal that is drawn up in this region or the next is more than a token displacement of powers. It is of the highest importance that any movement of power is followed by funding because ultimately, you can’t empower local councils if you impoverish them.

The principle of devolution resonates with a lot of local politicians in the north. We need local solutions to local problems and we’ve known for a long time that Westminster doesn’t have all the answers.

For the past couple of years, George Osbourne has been talking about the “Northern Powerhouse”. Despite this being a Tory initiative, I’m sure I’m not the only Labour politician, who despite myself, wanted it to succeed. I hoped that this renewed focus on northern England would bring more growth, prosperity and opportunities to our northern cities and give them the chance to control their own destinies. But the truth is that Osbourne has drastically failed to follow rhetoric with action. Labour should defend the idea of the ‘Northern Powerhouse’ because in principle it’s something our party should get behind. But we should also hold the Tories to account over their endemic failure to deliver on their promises.

Labour should be arguing for a more ambitious devolution that shapes a new relationship between citizens and the state and redefines the relationship between local and national government. We need to spend more time talking about what we would do with additional funding and powers. Regional devolution has the potential to play a pivotal role in solving the housing crisis by giving regions greater powers and freedoms when it comes to building affordable housing and Labour should be making this case. It’s not good enough for us just to complain that there isn’t enough power or there isn’t enough money. We need to show that we are the party of the north and we have the answers.

I’ve lived in northern England all my life and I’m very proud of our part of the world. I don’t believe that our part of the country is on the decline and it frustrates me when politicians talk about us like we’re the weak link. Labour shouldn’t see the north as a barrier that it needs to overcome on our route back to government but one of the strongest branches of our movement and our country. We need to stop berating the north and utilise it to make our party and our nation stronger.

Before the General Election, David Cameron said he would not cut Tax Credits. He lied, and he cut Tax Credits. Before the General Election, David Cameron also vowed to boost NHS funding and protect our National Health Services – another pledge which has come unstuck.

Over the course of the last parliament, the Government transferred responsibility for public health from the Department of Health, to Local Government. At the time the government promised to bring public health funding in Leeds up to a “target allocation” that would meet the population needs of the city given its size and diversity. In the first year Leeds received a 10% uplift in our public health budget, but for this financial year the grant was frozen with Leeds still £6m short of the government’s own target. Then just one month after the General Election George Osborne cynically announced he was clawing back £200m from the public health services up and down the country this financial year.

He’s pretending that these are local Government cuts, but these are cuts to front line health services and Leeds will see the largest funding cut in Yorkshire.

The public health budget covers things like sexual health, school nursing, health visiting, suicide prevention, domestic violence prevention, drug and alcohol treatment services and weight loss support as well as health protection services including immunisation programmes and infection control. The Government is slashing funding to all of these, while pretending that they are protecting health spending.

In fact the largest external organisation affected in Leeds, is Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust. Definitely an NHS cut.

One group affected is Skyline. Leeds Skyline provides support services for anyone living with or affected by HIV in Leeds. Next week is HIV awareness week, at the same time as the Government is withdrawing funding for vital services for HIV+ people. It is absolutely shameful.

Leeds Labour City Council is doing everything possible to save services such as Skyline, but with the Government raiding the public health budget in Leeds in year to the tune of £2.8million, on top of the existing shortfall of £6million, this is a difficult task.

Skyline demonstrates that these cuts are not just numbers on a spreadsheet, but real people and real lives.

Councillor Lisa Mulherin, Labour’s Executive Member for Health, Wellbeing and Adults is clear about the situation:

“The government promised to protect and enhance funding for public health in Leeds when it moved across from the NHS to Leeds City Council. The events of this year clearly show they had very different intentions. They held a sham consultation over 4 weeks in the school summer holidays and are now ploughing ahead with a raid on the frontline health services we contract predominantly from the NHS and third sector in Leeds. We knew the Government had contempt for local government but this shows complete contempt for the public as well and flies in the face of the government’s claims to be protecting health services. They are not protecting health services: they are cutting them directly through us.”

The Conservatives promised to boost health spending before the election. Their decision to now slash health spending is hitting people hard.

The Government must to stick to the pledge they were elected on, and reinstate health funding to Leeds.

I am writing with regards to your recent letter to Councillor Ian Hudspeth, the leader of Oxfordshire County Council, and the offer of a meeting with your advisers in the Number 10 policy unit in order to discuss the implementation of local government cuts in your area.

In your letter to him of 14th September you stated:

“In that context, I would be happy to initiate a further dialogue with advisers in the No10 Policy Unit and yourself – please contact Sheridan Westlake if you wish to take this up.”

I note from media coverage and Labour MP Jon Ashworth’s letter to Sir Jeremy Heywood, that were this offer available to Oxfordshire Council only, as the local authority relevant to your own constituency, you would be in breach of the ministerial code which makes clear that your Ministerial facilities should not be used for constituency activities.

I therefore write to request a similar meeting with your Number 10 Policy Unit.

I share your concern about cuts to frontline services, including elderly day care centres, child care centres and libraries and agree that cuts to these areas would be ‘unwelcome and counter-productive’.

As a council we have borne the heavy burden of the last set of local government cuts by making all the ‘creative’ and ‘back office savings’ we can. Having made those savings, we are now faced with further budget cuts handed down by central government and we now see no other option but to consider cuts to front line services that will hit children, the elderly and the vulnerable in Leeds.

On 1 December up to 2 million people could easily drop off the electoral register. That’s on top of the 8 million who are not on the register at all.

That’s 10 million people – or 1 in 5 of all eligible adults – who won’t be able to vote.

These changes are happening because the Government is rushing changes to the way we register to vote, against the advice of its election watchdog, the Electoral Commission.

Leeds Labour says: ‘Whether you love us, loathe us or really can’t make your mind up some days – it’s your right to have your say. #NoVoteNoVoice’

So before it’s too late…

Check if you are on the register by calling Leeds Elections Office 0113 2476726

If you’re not on then sort it online here – It takes 5 minutes – and you’ll need your National Insurance number if you have one. (And remember if you are a student you can register at both your home address and your Leeds address)

Once you’re sorted than get friends, family and housemates to check as well.

You can print off the form here if people want to fill in a paper copy. Completed forms need to be posted to Electoral Services, Level 2, Town Hall, The Headrow, Leeds LS1 3AD or handed in at the Town Hall Main Reception.

If you try to get this sorted and are still having difficulty then email jonathan.pryor@leeds.gov.uk or ring and leave a message on 0113 2476726.

We’ll help as far as we can. And no-one will ask you anything about how you vote.

Let’s avoid it becoming NoVOTEmber and and make sure we find Leeds’ #MissingVoters